Vicki Iseman Speaks Out, Denies Affair With McCain

WASHINGTON — A female telecommunications lobbyist who became part of an explosive story early this year about John McCain has broken months of silence to deny the main subtext of the account _ that she was suspected of being romantically involved with the Republican presidential candidate. "I did not have a sexual relationship with Senator McCain," Vicky Iseman told the National Journal magazine.

Iseman was the subject of an article by The New York Times in February that said in 1999 McCain aides worried that the Arizona senator and the lobbyist may be having an affair. The newspaper did not publish any evidence of such a relationship.

The story alleged that McCain wrote letters and pushed legislation involving television station ownership that would have benefited Iseman's clients.

Iseman, 41, defended herself in what National Journal described as a series of interviews and e-mail exchanges.

"I never had an affair or an inappropriate relationship with Senator McCain, and that means I never acted unethically in my dealings with the senator." Iseman, who is a partner in the lobbying firm of Alcalde & Fay, told the magazine. "I have never even been alone with Senator McCain."

But her public emergence, coming less than three weeks before the election, also serves to remind the public about a story that had receded from memory. When the story broke, the allegations of sex and influence-peddling caused a sensation. McCain furiously denied the story and described Iseman as merely a friend.

"At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust," he said at the time.

Since then, McCain's relationship with the media has grown increasingly cool.

Story continues below

advertisement

Iseman told the National Journal: "The New York Times set out to write a story about a 'romantic relationship' in exchange for legislative favors. ... Make the lobbyist a prostitute _ pretty heady stuff. The only problem was, they were wrong on all counts."

Iseman blamed former McCain adviser John Weaver of pushing the story to The Times. After the story broke, though, McCain aide Steve Schmidt told MSNBC that "nobody on the McCain campaign believes that John Weaver was the source on this."

Weaver was quoted in The Times acknowledging meeting with Iseman while working as a strategist for McCain in 1999. He told the newspaper that McCain's political team worried that as a lobbyist close to the Arizona senator she might hurt his image as a fighter against special interests.

In an e-mail to the Associated Press Thursday, Weaver said: "I feel sorry for the woman, but my responsibility was to protect my client, which I did."

At the center of the lobbying story were two letters McCain wrote in late 1999 to the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of Florida-based Paxson Communications _ which had paid Iseman as its lobbyist _ urging quick consideration of a proposal to buy a television station license in Pittsburgh. At the time, Paxson's chief executive, Lowell W. "Bud" Paxson, also was a major contributor to McCain's 2000 presidential campaign.

McCain did not urge the FCC commissioners to approve the proposal, but he asked for speedy consideration of the deal, which had been pending for two years. Then-FCC Chairman William Kennard complained that McCain's request "comes at a sensitive time in the deliberative process."

McCain wrote the letters after he received more than $20,000 in contributions from Paxson executives and lobbyists. Paxson also lent McCain his company's jet at least four times during 1999 for campaign travel.

Comments

[Turtleposer]

If I had ever had the bad taste to sleep with John McCain, I'd deny it too.

[ByersL]

She's l yi ng. Wom an sc orned. Wants to be the last na il in the cof fin of McCain's campaign..­...

[KarenJW]

Look at the man.......­..........­.....would­n't you deny the allegations if you were in her shoes?

[Alonzo]

At least we know now that McCain has better taste in women than Bill.

[ByersL]

She's lying. Woman scorned. Wants to be the last nail in the coffin of McCain's campaign..­...

[Voltage]

I guess it all depends on what the meaning of is is.

[morefromLA]

Yes, yes, I understand. Of course, I think I've heard something similar before: "I did not have sexual relations with that man."

[Courtney250]

I trust the people around McCain that were concerned enough about the inappropriate nature of the relationship to keep her away from him. If it was all innocent, why has the realtionship mysteriously ended?

Maybe in her denials we should ask her if she is clear on what the definition of 'is' is. (Sorry Bill.)

[LeeCalif]

And she waited seven months to say it ..........

[grumpygranny66]

I wonder how much BEER $$$$$ was given to her for that denial?? Just wondering.

[GeoLee]

And why now? Are the robocalls tomorrow going to accuse Obama of spreading the rumor in the first place? this is a set up for something.

[JungleRoses]

if his aides thought it was sexual, then it probably was true. Now there should be some porn called Manic McCain

[pshelleyg]

Come on. This story has no legs from the angle of a sex scandal. If anyone one tries to reignite it, it
will create a backlash for McCain again. If you'll recall, it created sympathy for him when the story first came out, because the MSM latched onto those prurient aspects of the story; the potency in the story rested in how it tied John McCain to lobbies as he continued to define himself as a maverick. It's a soft spot neither the media nor the Obama campaign seems to want to examine at length, and McCain came close to succeeding during last night's debate in defining Obama instead as the candidate who is most in bed with special interests, the corrupt Chicago politician, etc. I'm not sure if Obama defended himself particularly well in that area. However, the main theme of the original NYT article was more about his close allies in lobbies. Sex was secondary and so conjectural that it probably shouldn't have been touched. The Times took a real beating, as you may recall, for touching that aspect of the story with so few reliable sources.

[Lagniappe]

Iseman has represented communications companies for almost two decades. Does this Iseman interest have anything to do with the free cell tower that was installed at McCain's Sedona ranch-the story broke yesterday. Does her firm,or she represent the comapnies who provided free of charge, the cell tower to John and Cindy? McCain sits on the Commerce and Communications Board. THIS could explain the resurfacing of Iseman.

[MikaS]

Apparently this woman is writing a book and needed to get this story out there again. This is one on the few stories in the campaign that was considered a non-story from the beginning. The New York Times got a lot more crap from it than either McCain or Iseman. Poor girl spread her legs for McCreepy and then realized she wouldn't get rich for it. I wouldn't be surprised if she broke the story in the first place.

[Lagniappe]

Did Vicki Iseman “Steal Honor” in THREE Presidential Elections?
By: emptywheel Thursday February 21, 2008


John McCain denies any honor was stolen--neither his nor Ms. Iseman's. Or rather, he denies "the story," though it's not clear whether he's denying that his relationship with Iseman was inappropriate or that he did favors for her. So I guess I'll leave it up to you to decide whether she stole McCain's honor in both the 2000 and 2008 presidential elections.

For the moment, though, I'm more interested in the 2004 election--the one McCain didn't run in. You see, I find it a mighty curious coincidence that two of the companies for which Iseman was lobbying John McCain in 1999 and 2000--the time of their potentially inappropriate relationship--also happen to be the two television companies that championed the Kerry smear, "Stolen Honor," in 2004.~~~~~­~~~The entire emptywheel article is well worth reading!

[sandals]

Is she pregnant with his love child?
Does she want payed off?

[McNuts]

In her Newsweek article Cindy explained that she and McRooster have lived virtually separate lives for the past 20 years so isn't it fair to surmise that each has sought other outlets. Whether Cindy tightened her face for pool boys or GOP gigilos, does it matter. Likewise does it matter whether McCain noodled Iseman or vice versa. At least he stayed out of airport stalls.